Is Glastonbury behind the curve?

[Dom Wall]

Tbf though, that's a band that have been marketed for a young teenage girl market. They're not the sort of band that are going to be headlining festivals anytime soon as their main demographic don't even go to festivals yet

I think it's somewhat true that its harder for bands to become 'headline' status nowadays but I don't feel it's as rare as some people are making it out to be.

[verrymerry]

What kind of a curve are we talking, is this a bell curve?

[frostypaw]

More of a poisson distribution, very few at the top end

[robu]

"Crowd demographic not changed as much as you think actually"

Seriously???????????? I think it could be you mistaking Glastonbury for another festival.

Edited July 14, 2014 by robu

[UEF]

For the first time, I found myself sharing the fields with a significant minority of people who didn't appear to 'get' or care for the Glastonbury ethos or vibe, and who cared more about being seen at Glastonbury in the right clothes, doing whatever was deemed by their peer group to be the right kind of thing.

[musky]

Nowadays, that sector of society hardly exists.

[The Other Steve]

and in fact, I'm expecting tickets to be easier to get this October, precisely because of that.

[Babyquack]

Oh don't get me wrong, I didn't mean they would be, but it still shows how quickly a "band" can rise in popularity! If they ever headline festivals it's a bad day for music (saying that, I could see them headline a a stage at V if they continue to rise..)

[robu]

Wrong. Just plain wrong.

[frostypaw]

You should drink more often

[Peaceman]

Get where youre coming from robu. Times have changed. When I first started going in the 80s I learnt a lot about different ways of doing things, alternative lifestyles and the like. Even though I was a CND volunteer there was a lot to find out. But, of course, it was great fun as well. There seems to be a much bigger proportion of the crowd now just there to get off their faces for five days. Nothing wrong with that but it does seem to be at the expense of taking in the festival ethos and culture. Or am I just getting old?

[eFestivals]

i hope this is true

well, I'm pretty confident that it will be.

From where i'm sat, I believe it was the case that this year was the hardest yet to get tickets (as an average, obviously).

(the performance of the sales system needs to be part of that consideration).

Given that it followed the biggest band for a mainstream audience Glastonbury have ever had on the bill, it seems pretty clear that there's a relationship between the big band followed by big sales.

Of course, Eavis saying last August that "we've got four of the biggest bands in the world" won't have helped for this year's festival, but we get a decent pay-back from that for the rest of eternity, cos Eavis won't be believed on those sorts of comments from now on.

[Amy Lawn]

Of course, Eavis saying last August that "we've got four of the biggest bands in the world" won't have helped for this year's festival, but we get a decent pay-back from that for the rest of eternity, cos Eavis won't be believed on those sorts of comments from now on.

[eFestivals]

People will still believe him, regardless.

Nope, they'll have the media pointing out it wasn't true last time.

All his previous similar statements could be reconciled to the facts in some way or another. That doesn't work at all for 2014.

Journo's tend to remember who they put trust in who then made their writing look foolish, to avoid looking foolish again.

Edited July 15, 2014 by eFestivals

[A Guy Called Matt]

People will still believe him, regardless.

[CaledonianGonzo]

It's weird how there seems to be a sort of nebulous unspoken consensus that this wasn't an especially vintage year.

I wonder what the viewing figures were.

[A Guy Called Matt]

It's weird how there seems to be a sort of nebulous unspoken consensus that this wasn't an especially vintage year.

I wonder what the viewing figures were.

[Amy Lawn]

Nope, they'll have the media pointing out it wasn't true last time.

All his previous similar statements could be reconciled to the facts in some way or another. That doesn't work at all for 2014.

Journo's tend to remember who they put trust in who then made their writing look foolish, to avoid looking foolish again.

[LondonTom]

What is a 'vintage year'?

[kidpresentable]

I think the OP puts too much weight on the importance of the headliners. For me, one of the things which sets it apart from the other large festivals is that it's not really about headliners. I think it would be good if they articulated that more.

[Peaceman]

I guess a lot of people see it on tv and decide to go. But that concentrates almost entirely on the main stages. I cant see that changing. On tv I think it looks very similar to any other festival, just bigger. I know they throw in the odd 5 minute film about the 'real' Glastonbury, but most people only ever see the big acts on the big stages. So when new people go, its understandable that they stick to those areas. Certainly when I was up in the green fields this year there were very few people there. But thats the way its gone and unless the coverage changes, thats what people will expect. So despite the tickets selling out, headliners will always be important to some.

[A Guy Called Matt]

2010......2013 arguably until the sunday Pyramid headline slot

I'd even put 2014 behind 2011 and I had two my favourite acts ever playing this year.!!

[Bradders]

Line up weather and lots of other little factors in a zeitgeist that gives a gist of how good it was. I'd say 2014 wasn't a "vintage year" from the vibe people give off, 2009 I would say was a "vintage year"

Edited July 15, 2014 by Bradders

[rjb94]

Surely this is all subjective. I enjoyed 2014 more than 2013 - so it was more of a 'vintage year' for me

[Monkismo]

Surely this is all subjective. I enjoyed 2014 more than 2013 - so it was more of a 'vintage year' for me